Talk:Keffiyeh

This page is subject to the extended confirmed restriction related to the Arab-Israeli conflict.

Arafat's wasn't traditional

The main article says:

It would later become a trademark symbol of Yasser Arafat, who was rarely seen without a keffiyeh. Arafat would wear the keffiyeh in the traditional manner, around the head and wrapped by an egal, but he also wore in the neckline of his military fatigues.

Granted the tail end isn't grammatical enough to know how to even correct... However, I've heard that Arafat's keffiyeh was unique: he always wore a split in the front (even visible in the photo on this page) to symbolize the divide between the West Bank and Gaza. Since I heard that a decade (or two) ago I've always found this detail to draw my attention when I see pictures of him or of other keffiyehs.

I'm not going to make this edit myself, but I'm sure that the words "traditional manner" are therefore inaccurate.

Palestinian national symbol

On 12 December 2023 Fgnievinski added at the beginning of the Palestinian national symbol section "This section duplicates the scope of other articles, specifically Palestinian keffiyeh. Please discuss this issue and help introduce a summary style to the section by replacing the section with a link and a summary or by splitting the content into a new article.". About a minute later at Talk:Palestinian keffiyeh#Duplication) Fgnievinski added "Section Keffiyeh#Palestinian national symbol duplicates Palestinian keffiyeh. Thus, the former should be merged in the latter. A summary could be left behind, in summary style.".

In March at Talk:Palestinian keffiyeh#Duplication) Alitheboss55 replied "I think this article should be merged with the main Keffiyeh article. as this article describes the same pieace of clothing but is only referencing its significance in Palestinian culture, it does not need its own article and should be part of the main article".

There doesn't appear to have been any discussion here. Mcljlm (talk) 20:34, 1 May 2024 (UTC)

Please don't duplicate the discussion about the duplication of content; kindly keep the discussion centralized at Talk:Palestinian_keffiyeh#Duplication. Thanks. fgnievinski (talk) 01:53, 3 May 2024 (UTC)

In your note Fgnievinski you wrote "Please discuss this issue" without indicating discussion should take place at Talk:Palestinian_keffiyeh#Duplication. It cannot be assumed that everyone seeing it will assume the discussion is at Palestinian keffiyeh; it didn't occur to me and I only came across your section there by chance a while after starting this section. If the section here is merged with Palestinian_keffiyeh there'll not be any indication here that the matter was discussed. Mcljlm (talk) 14:43, 3 May 2024 (UTC)

Dead Link, archived here:

Please update the Bram reference with the following archived link: https://web.archive.org/web/20231201140959/https://blog.nli.org.il/en/hoi_keffiyeh/ --Scharb (talk) 19:20, 17 October 2024 (UTC)

Edit request: interesting references

Ancient Hebrew depicted on Egyptian stele wearing a similar garment

The 1903 Encyclopaedia Biblica by Cheyne and Black mentions the Kefiyyeh in the "Turban" article, noting that such a head-covering was worn by Shishak's Hebrew Prisoner at Karnak. (shown)

An 1898 travel guide to Syria and Palestine recommends purchasing and tying a keffiyeh under the hat because it "protects the neck and cheeks admirably from the sun" and notes that its popularity in Damascus in a yellow and red striped variety.

The popularity of the red-and-yellow keffiyeh is also mentioned in the 1893 Cyclopedia Biblica by McClintock and Strong.

According to the 1877 Dictionary of the Bible by Smith, the modern kefiyyeh has a possible biblical predecessor found in Ezekiel 13:18 "mispachot" but equivocates that translations vary and the word may refer to a different type of veil.

Cook's Tourists Handbook for Palestine mentions that the traveler to the Silk Bazaar in Damascus might wish to purchase "one of those gay head-dresses that has charmed them so often in Palestine"

"Sudra" in the Bible has sometimes been translated as "Keffiyeh".

Beaumont, in his 1868 travelogue "Desert Wanderings," expresses he must praise this "most invaluable article of costume for the country and climate," pining, "even here in England, in some of our July days, I have, when confined to the more conventional hat, sighed for the more useful and, some may think, more graceful keffiyeh."

I searched on Google N-gram Finder to find the earliest available instances of the word "keffiyeh," before it was politicized, and the results were very interesting. --Scharb (talk) 21:19, 17 October 2024 (UTC) Scharb (talk) 21:19, 17 October 2024 (UTC)

References

Why distortion?

Why was the fact that the name of the keffiyeh goes back to the city of Kufa removed? Where did the Italian claim come from? There is no basis for supplying Italian words to the Arabs. 91.186.250.204 (talk) 07:20, 19 February 2025 (UTC)

There's no evidence whatsoever, of any kind, for a relationship between the headdress and the city of Kufa. The only reason anyone says they're related is that they sound similar. The Italian etymology is supported by many scholars, who assume that it's a modern word. If it were antique it would probably be traced to Semitic parallels like Biblical Hebrew koba and Aramaic kubaya. GordonGlottal (talk) 03:13, 21 February 2025 (UTC)

There are not many scholars who say that it has any connection to Italian, so why lie? The source clearly says that the word is probably from Italian, and in the same source it shows that it has been known for centuries and was mentioned in the book The Arabian Nights, so how did you make it a modern word? You are clearly lying, man, and Arabic is also Semitic, and the fact that there is an ancient similarity does not mean that the modern meaning is the same, so talk to me logically and honestly, not lying and trying to be clever, and as I said before, there are no relations between Italy and the Arabs to borrow the word 91.186.250.204 (talk) 18:12, 21 February 2025 (UTC)

just give us a source for the kufa word origin and we'll add it 𐩣𐩫𐩧𐩨 Abo Yemen (𓃵) 18:15, 21 February 2025 (UTC)

this https://www.britannica.com/topic/kaffiyeh

So I hope you remove the claim that it may have been borrowed from Italian in the source, and in the article something else is basically written, i.e. it is a distortion, and I repeat there is no connection between Italian and Arabs for the word to be borrowed 91.186.250.204 (talk) 18:26, 21 February 2025 (UTC)

Where did you disappear to? 91.186.254.133 (talk) 21:45, 22 February 2025 (UTC)

"Will McDonald is a New York City-based writer and performer. His work has appeared in The Village Voice, Brooklyn Rail, and the Stonecoast Review. He is a graduate of the MFA Creative Writing and Publishing program at Long Island University, and is presently at work on his debut novel." This author does not read Arabic and has no expertise in philology, as is also apparent from every line of his article. GordonGlottal (talk) 01:11, 23 February 2025 (UTC)

It is not up to you to make whomever you want to be fluent in Arabic or not, first of all this is a reliable source, secondly the source in the article I talked about and that he thinks it is from Italian and does not confirm this as written in the article and I repeat there is no connection between Italy and the Arabs to borrow the word, so your attempt is a failure.

The encyclopedia that verified the authenticity of the article is Britannica, a global leader in the field of information, so again your attempt is a failure to try to deny the theory and distort the source to suit your mood 91.186.254.133 (talk) 13:05, 23 February 2025 (UTC)

orr maybe find a better source that is written by someone who knows what they're doing? After all, if the origin of the word is from Kufa then there must be other sources that say so 𐩣𐩫𐩧𐩨 Abo Yemen (𓃵) 15:57, 23 February 2025 (UTC)

This encyclopedia is already widely available on Wikipedia and is frequently cited, so why is this being rejected now??? 91.186.251.160 (talk) 17:35, 23 February 2025 (UTC)

Gordon gave you a very good reason 𐩣𐩫𐩧𐩨 Abo Yemen (𓃵) 17:49, 23 February 2025 (UTC)

No, he did not give a reason, but rather denied it in an attempt to evade the matter. The existing source only shows the possibility that it is borrowed, but the article confirms that it is borrowed, and this contradicts the source and reality. Logically and historically, there was no contact between the Arabs and the Italians. Secondly, the Britannica Encyclopedia, a global leader in the field of information, and as I said before, it is widely available on Wikipedia as a source, so why the denial and rejection now??

https://themarkaz.org/the-story-of-the-keffiyeh/

https://kuvrd.ca/blogs/stories/the-significance-of-the-keffiyeh

https://www.yourdictionary.com/keffiyeh

https://www.middleeasteye.net/discover/palestine-keffiyeh-resistance-traditional-headdress 91.186.251.160 (talk) 18:30, 23 February 2025 (UTC)

KUVRD appears to be an online fashion brand. I'd never previously heard of The Markaz and it has never been discussed at WP:RSN, so I'm not sure about its general reliability. In this specific case it is republishing an article from thezay.org, which is likewise an e-retailer. Middle East Eye has been discussed and is certainly not a scholarly publication. All three of these are clearly amateur bloggers repeating what they found online. By contrast, here is another real scholar (Anastas al-Karmali) supporting the "cuffia" thesis: https://archive.org/details/al-muqtataf-magazine/%D8%A7%D9%84%D9%85%D9%82%D8%AA%D8%B7%D9%81%20-1941/page/n245. Similarly Mahmud Fahmi Hijazi: "الكوفية إيطالية معربة لكبار شيوخ البلد . أما عامة الشعب وأصلها في الإيطالية: Cuffia". A search turns up many scholars, as I said. GordonGlottal (talk) 04:04, 24 February 2025 (UTC)

There is also an interesting report in the first volume of Al-Machriq (1898). An elder in Baghdad rejects the "Kufa" etymology and claims that it was borrowed from the Crusaders and is first recorded in the 14th century. This latter claim seems to be correct, although I have not seen it mentioned in other sources. Al-Maqrizi uses it here. GordonGlottal (talk) 04:31, 24 February 2025 (UTC)

What does a sheikh have to do with something like this?? On what basis did you make it true??? Or do you just want this!! And I did not see what you are talking about in Al-Maqrizi's book?? And you are talking about a magazine for the Crusaders basically hahahahaha 91.186.251.160 (talk) 10:39, 24 February 2025 (UTC)

And you bring me a Christian cleric who is known for his mistakes in the Arab world and cite him as a citation?? And what this cleric claims is that it is from the modern Latin languages ​​and there is no basis for his reliance on this, and it was mentioned in the books of the Arabs centuries ago, like Al-Maqrizi himself. You only believe what you want to believe, and deny what you do not want. Is this because you are a Zionist! 91.186.251.160 (talk) 10:47, 24 February 2025 (UTC)

2 1 3 4 91.186.251.160 (talk) 11:18, 24 February 2025 (UTC)

Al-Maqrizi says فيركب منهم اثنان بثوبي حرير أطلس أصفر وعلى رأس كل منهما كوفية الذهب. Nos. 1 and 4 we already discussed. No. 2 is interesting although not a modern scholar, and it says الكوفية ما يلبس على الرأس سميت لاستدارتها? Please follow wiki guidelines if you want to participate here. Academic sources are superior to online marketing blogs, and we WP:ASSUMEGOODFAITH. GordonGlottal (talk) 14:42, 24 February 2025 (UTC)

Again, Al-Maqrizi's words do not contain anything that denies the word, so what do you cite as evidence? The second is basically Christian and is known in the Arab world for his mistakes in the Arabic language and his blood refuted it many times.

And you did not discuss anything literally, you are evading, like the famous and reliable Encyclopedia Britannica and it is considered an academic source, you deny it because you do not want to admit this, and an article named for its roundness you can consider it another source, and as I said again the keffiyeh was mentioned in Arabic books centuries ago such as the book One Thousand and One Nights and there is no connection between Italy and the Arabs for the word to be transmitted to the Arabs from them, and I gave you many sources and you give sources that you yourself do not know what is in them or for people who were refuted in the language in the first place, so be realistic and do not laugh at yourself, you did not provide academic sources and you do not act logically in the first place and you deny it over and over again because you do not want to admit the matter, is this because you are a Zionist 91.186.251.160 (talk) 14:58, 24 February 2025 (UTC)

I cited Al-Maqrizi just to note that the report in Al-Machriq is correct, the word is attested in the 14th century. I do not know of any use of the word in One Thousand and One Nights, a work which anyway has a very complicated textual history. I think our conversation is over if you can't assume good faith. GordonGlottal (talk) 20:41, 24 February 2025 (UTC)

Al-Maqrizi mentioned the word "keffiyeh" and did not say anything else, as if it was borrowed. So what are you babbling about?? And as I said, the word was mentioned in the book One Thousand and One Nights, and I gave you many sources, so now you are just evading and you still insist that you are doing this because you are a Zionist. 91.186.251.160 (talk) 21:56, 24 February 2025 (UTC)

It would be nice of you to stop labeling Gordon as a zionist just because of a disagreement, that is if they are still willing to continue the convo 𐩣𐩫𐩧𐩨 Abo Yemen (𓃵) 07:29, 25 February 2025 (UTC)

I speak of the obvious, dear printer. 91.186.251.160 (talk) 10:21, 25 February 2025 (UTC)

you gotta give us a scholarly source if you want to add that part to the article 𐩣𐩫𐩧𐩨 Abo Yemen (𓃵) 10:57, 25 February 2025 (UTC)

I have given you many sources and a specific source from a scientific encyclopedia, and this encyclopedia was cited in many Wikipedia articles, but you ignore this and distort the article itself. In the beginning it is clearly written (Probably) that it is borrowed, but in the article you wrote with the phrase of confirmation, so this matter has a clear bias, so I am sure that he is doing this because he is a Zionist, my dear normalizer. 91.186.251.160 (talk) 11:21, 25 February 2025 (UTC)

1) Those blogs that you've provided are not scholarly sources
2) انا مش مطبع يا حبيبي and please stop using google translate 𐩣𐩫𐩧𐩨 Abo Yemen (𓃵) 11:39, 25 February 2025 (UTC)

Is the Encyclopedia Britannica no longer a source?? Then why is it cited in many Wikipedia encyclopedias?? And why is what is written in the source and not what is written in the article??و شكلك مطبع حبيبي 91.186.251.160 (talk) 11:46, 25 February 2025 (UTC)

There is another meaning for the word, the keffiyeh: what is worn on the head, named for its roundness.

من معجم مختار الصحاح ، الا يعتبر مصدرا؟

https://maajim.com/dictionary/%D9%83%D9%88%D9%81%D9%8A%D8%A9 91.186.251.160 (talk) 12:03, 25 February 2025 (UTC)

What does this have to do with the city of Kufa? 𐩣𐩫𐩧𐩨 Abo Yemen (𓃵) 12:06, 25 February 2025 (UTC)

No, the author of that specific article does not read Arabic and has no expertise in philology. He is not qualified to write about anything Arab-related. 𐩣𐩫𐩧𐩨 Abo Yemen (𓃵) 12:05, 25 February 2025 (UTC)

I told you it has another meaning for the word! The article you are talking about was reviewed by the encyclopedia itself. It was not published like this for no reason. Didn't you read that they reviewed the article? 91.186.251.160 (talk) 12:11, 25 February 2025 (UTC)

And you did not tell me why what is in the alleged source is different from what is written in the Wikipedia article????? 91.186.251.160 (talk) 12:13, 25 February 2025 (UTC)

Read this

1 91.186.251.160 (talk) 12:19, 25 February 2025 (UTC)